Nikon Z6ii and Z7ii Wildlife Photography Review

[Steve]

It's finally available - my Z6/7ii wildlife photography review!

Also, before you scold me for working on this while trying to recover from COVID, this was 95% complete before I went into the hospital. It's just that once it was finished, the next day I felt so miserable I didn't feel like double-checking / posting it. So, it's sat for the last three and a half weeks on my computer. I promise I didn't over do it finishing it off

This one is pretty short - it's mostly discussing how the new cameras work for wildlife. We'll cover what works well, what's average, and performance aspects that are less than ideal for some wildlife scenarios. Check it out:

Enjoy!!

 

[Woodpecker]

Hi Steve,
first of all - GREAT TO HAVE YOU BACK .

This was really interesting, after - also with your help - I took my step towards a D850. After having had to shoot it for quite some time on a day to day basis in a NP here in Germany, I am really impressed of IQ and the flexibility - including the the thing that you don't like --> Cropping . IMHO to me it is more a question whether to sell or keep my D750 as backup body or get a used D780 instead, rather than take a move to Z.
For me this question will come back if the Z9 will materialize. I remember times ages ago when there were attempts to do something about extending dynamic range, color rendition and color sensitivity by special sensor technology and at that time it really made a difference shooting the Fuji S5Pro with its two sensors per pixel. What Nikon is doing now with the stacked CMOS sensor is going in the same direction, but in a much enhanced manner n virtual versus two physical senors per pixel, because they can dynamically adapt the sensitivity of the physical pixel. So I am really curious about what the Nikon guys are able to achieve with the final version of their new sensor. Until then I try to use my current cameras to learn and improve, so that I can "legitimatize" me for using a Z9 or - from its perspective - make me acceptable for a Z9 to rest in my hands .

 

[Tim Karels]

That was a great review Steve. That hit all of the points that most other reviews of these two cameras seem to miss and are important for wildlife photographers. I have a D850 and Z7 but have been mostly interested in how the Z7II stacks up against the D850. Your review tells me that it is no D850 when it comes to AF speed and frame rate. I had thought that maybe I'll update the Z7 but since I mainly use the Z7 for landscape and the D850 for wildlife, I'm going to stick with what I have until something better comes along. Thanks for saving me a bunch of !

 

[smkunder]

Steve, fantastic review. I am so glad to hear from a wildlife perspective. I own the original Z6, and am having a hard time if it’s worth the financial hit to get the Z6ll. I also have D500 so I have action covered.

 

[Anjin San]

It's finally available - my Z6/7ii wildlife photography review!

Excellent...I was just waiting for this before ordering my 7II which I will no get to...although they’re out of stock at B&H and Adorama so who knows when it will show up...but that will give me plenty of time to read the AF mirrorless edition again as well as watch both your setup videos and Hudson Henry’s again just in case there are minor differences in suggested settings. Like you...he finds the 88 versions fine for wildlife including action and at least for him the eye AF appears to work pretty well even for birds and mammals so I will have to experiment there. The Z9 sounds really nice as does the A1...but a $6K+ body doesn’t make sense for my purposes and a brand switch doesn’t make sense either as that’s 20K at least.

Keep working on getting better...I know you’re chomping at the bit to get busy again...and goals are nice as is progress on those goals...but just don’t overdo it. Connie and I were both positive back in November and although our actual symptoms were minor we were exhausted and tired easily for almost a month afterwards.

 

[EricBowles]

Another great review, Steve.

I was using the Z7II last week and had similar results. For static subjects it's excellent and the AF accuracy provides a nice boost to the number of keepers.

The Z7II with the latest firmware did a very nice job picking up challenging subjects - shorebirds just above the waves and backlit birds in flight.

The weak spot I noticed was based on the lens. I tested the 50-250mm DX lens that is sold with the Z50. I was disappointed with both holding focus and sharpness, although with stationary subjects it was much better. There were several passes where I picked up the subject, had it in clear focus, and the camera just could not maintain focus with the 50-250. Even when focus was maintained, the images were soft beyond 50%. I tested about 300-350 frames. But when I switched to the 600 f/4 AFS VR with the FTZ, my success rate shot up and images were sharp at up to 200%. I had no problem with challenging lighting - even for images that I would have not taken outside of a test scenario. So in my testing, it was clear that lens performance impacts not only sharpness, but also the ability to focus on a moving subject.

 

[Whiskeyman]

I just watched it and you've let me know that neither of these is a camera for me. I'm very inclined to stay with my DSLRs, but have witnessed others shooting mirrorless and realize that I won't be able to hand-hold my DSLRs and long glass forever. For that moment, I can wait for Nikon to release another camera, such as the Z8 maybe?

Thank you.

 

[Steve]

Another great review, Steve.

I was using the Z7II last week and had similar results. For static subjects it's excellent and the AF accuracy provides a nice boost to the number of keepers.

The Z7II with the latest firmware did a very nice job picking up challenging subjects - shorebirds just above the waves and backlit birds in flight.

The weak spot I noticed was based on the lens. I tested the 50-250mm DX lens that is sold with the Z50. I was disappointed with both holding focus and sharpness, although with stationary subjects it was much better. There were several passes where I picked up the subject, had it in clear focus, and the camera just could not maintain focus with the 50-250. Even when focus was maintained, the images were soft beyond 50%. I tested about 300-350 frames. But when I switched to the 600 f/4 AFS VR with the FTZ, my success rate shot up and images were sharp at up to 200%. I had no problem with challenging lighting - even for images that I would have not taken outside of a test scenario. So in my testing, it was clear that lens performance impacts not only sharpness, but also the ability to focus on a moving subject.

That's really surprising. I wonder if there's something wrong with the lens itself???

 

[EricBowles]

That's really surprising. I wonder if there's something wrong with the lens itself???

I suspect that part of the issue is the lens itself is an inexpensive consumer lens. I also think the lens being a little soft means it lacked detail that could be used to refine focus further. I went back and looked at the Focus Point using Nikon NX Studio and there was a surprisingly large number of image where focus was missed or dropped with the 50-250, but a few minutes later with the same camera settings and 600 prime, the keeper rate was much higher.

It's possible some if the difference was the relative size of the AF Area in the viewfinder. Wide Large is a little too big in a DX frame to have enough control, but in an FX frame it seems to be a better choice.

It needs more testing with a suitable number of images.